QUOTE (Fly1 @ Jun 16 2009, 07:59 AM)

QUOTE (Don in Nanaimo @ Jun 14 2009, 12:33 PM)

Ingenuous Ken, and so let me take this a step further in my own interest of learning something about the task of spining.
What if a person clamped the butt section to the table at say a distance of 1" not overhanging and then attached a string and a plumbob to the overhanging end? If one then measured the distance the tip dropped precisely and did that on all six sides, would that not indicate where the spine is? Or is opposite to, however one views the question? Seems to me that unless the section is exactly perfect one would see one side being weaker, for what is the purpose to begin with if not to find the weakest or the strongest of the six sides?
Then Ken, or anyone else who is interested, how would that compare to your method and other methods?
You could use that method to find the weakest or strongest side but I'm not interested in that. I just want the smoothest casting rod so I want it to vibrate in one direction only along the rod length not all over the place that can happen if you just look for the strongest side or weakest side. When your on the water the last thing you think about is can I lift the line better now or fight a fish better, no you think man that's a nice casting rod. So it's up to you to decide which is more important.
Ken

I see your point Ken. I was assuming that the only thing you would be looking for is deciding which direction would be the strongest but you are also interested in what the vibration indicates to you. And as for deciding whether to lift the line or fight the fish, I was assuming that it was a choice of whether you wanted more power forward for casting or more power against the bend the fish puts in the rod. (sorry for the amateurish way of stating it) However, now I'm wondering if my proposed method would give you a different result or the same result from your method. Curious thing too that's maybe worth pondering and that's, if one direction is the strongest then is the opposite direction the weakest?
And now that I'm back on this topic, I will just say that I emailed Milward and got an explanation on spline placement. Fwiw, he maintains that the natural rotational placement used by Garrison is the worst way of doing it. He takes the splines and distributes them so that neighbours become opposite. For example, if you split them out and number them in order you will have 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9. and so on up to say 24. You would then rearrange them for example in an order of 1,7,21,2,8,22 , which is placing adjacent strips opposite.
Overkill or perfection? I'm not the one to say but it becomes apparent to me that if you have a weak area in the culm which is in the area of strips 1 and 2 then you will be placing two weak strips opposite each other. That doesn't sound like the most desirable either.
I understand that many have no interest in the least on where the strips are placed, as opposed to the other extreme. Hmmmmmmm? Just throwing around ideas for interest sake now.